Dear Members of the Virginia Board of Health,

I respectfully submit this public comment on behalf of The Family Foundation in support of a rulemaking petition that seeks to safeguard the integrity, fairness, and safety of female-only sports in Virginia by limiting participation in these categories to biological females. This request aligns with the intent of Title IX, the current scientific consensus on biological differences between sexes, and growing concerns from parents, coaches, and athletes regarding the safety and fairness of women’s sports.

1. Upholding Title IX and the Original Intent of Sex-Based Protections

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was enacted to ensure that women and girls have equal access and opportunity in federally funded education programs, including athletics. Title IX explicitly recognizes “sex” as a binary biological characteristic—male and female—not as a self-declared identity. For over 50 years, Title IX has protected the advancement of women in athletics by creating female-only sports categories.

Allowing biological males, regardless of gender identity, to compete in female divisions undermines the original purpose of Title IX. In contact and competitive sports, where biological differences translate directly to athletic performance and injury risk, the consequences are especially stark. Fairness and safety should not be compromised to accommodate an ideology at odds with empirical science.

2. Scientific Consensus on Biological Sex Differences

Decades of peer-reviewed research in physiology, endocrinology, and sports medicine affirm that males, on average, have significant athletic advantages over females. These include:

• Greater muscle mass and bone density
• Higher levels of hemoglobin and cardiovascular endurance
• Faster reaction times and sprinting speeds
• Larger heart and lung capacity
• More explosive upper-body and lower-body strength
  
  

A 2015 study published in Physiology, titled “Sex-based differences in skeletal muscle kinetics and fiber type composition,” concluded that males tend to have a greater proportion of type II (fast-twitch) muscle fibers, which are associated with explosive power and strength, while females generally have more type I (slow-twitch) fibers, favoring endurance.  Thus, the muscle fiber composition supports male advantages in high-intensity, sports like sprinting and weightlifting.

The Journal of Endocrine Reviews published in 2018 a study titled “Circulating testosterone as the hormonal basis of sex differences in athletic performance,” which found that testosterone levels are typically 15–20 times higher in males, and play a key role in increasing muscle mass, hemoglobin concentration, and endurance capacity.  This elevated testosterone is strongly linked to greater strength, speed, and aerobic capacity in males, even after puberty and into adulthood.

In a Sports Medicine study published in 2021, titled “Transgender women in the female category of sport: Perspectives on physiology and fairness,” which assessed the retention of male physiological advantages post-transition (after hormone therapy). The study concluded that biological males retain significant advantages in muscle mass, strength, and VO? max even after a year of testosterone suppression. The findings are frequently cited in debates about fairness in female sports categories and support the idea that male puberty imparts lasting physical advantages.

The NCAA’s own data has acknowledged that biological males perform 10–30% better than females in various sports disciplines. This performance gap matters in competitive sports, where a fraction of a second can mean the difference between first place and being disqualified.

3. Real-World Consequences: Examples of Girls Getting Hurt and Losing Opportunities

Virginia and other states have already seen troubling consequences from the inclusion of biological males in female sports categories:

• Physical Injury: In 2022, a female high school volleyball player in North Carolina suffered a concussion and neck injury after being spiked in the face by a biologically male opponent identifying as female. The velocity and power behind the strike exceeded typical female athletic norms, causing serious injury.
  
  
• Lost Scholarships and Recognition: Female track athletes in Connecticut were consistently displaced from podium finishes and state records by two biological males identifying as female. These girls lost not only titles but also visibility for collegiate recruitment and scholarship opportunities.
  
  
• Psychological Impact: For many girls, the presence of a male-bodied competitor in female locker rooms and fields of play is a source of emotional stress and perceived unfairness. This can lead to withdrawal from sport, which undermines the health and confidence-building benefits that Title IX was designed to foster. Swim team captains at Roanoke College, Lily, and Bailey, were being forced by the NCAA and Roanoke College to accommodate the preferences of one male swimmer who previously swam on a men’s team and now prefers to compete on our women’s swim team. In a statement read to the VHSL, they expressed how they were emotionally blackmailed which jeopardized their mental health and well-being, leading to lost sleep, emotional stress, and a lack of initiative to practice.
  
  

4. The Role of the Board of Health

The Virginia Board of Health holds a public health mandate to promote the well-being, safety, and health equity of all Virginians. Ensuring that female athletes are not subjected to unfair competition or increased risk of physical injury due to male participation in sex-segregated sports falls squarely within this mandate.

The Board can act within its rulemaking authority to:

• Define “female” and “male” for the purpose of competitive athletics as biological sex, determined at birth;
• Create regulations that protect female-only categories in school and community sports programs;
• Recommend policies that prioritize safety and fairness over social or political trends that conflict with science-based standards.
  
  

5. Public Support for Fairness in Women’s Sports

A new poll from NBC News reveals that 75% of Americans oppose transgender women participating in female sports and believe athletes should compete on teams that match their sex assigned at birth. Bipartisan majorities across demographics, including women and young adults, support protecting fairness in sports.

Virginia voters and parents overwhelmingly support fair play. They want their daughters to enjoy the benefits of sports—leadership development, teamwork, scholarship access—without the threat of physical harm or unfair competition from male-bodied individuals.

6. Proposed Action and Scope of Rulemaking
This petition respectfully requests the Board of Health initiate rulemaking that:

• Establishes clear definitions of “biological female” for the purposes of participation in girls’ and women’s sports;
• Prohibits biological males from competing in female-designated categories in contact and competitive sports governed by schools, universities, and community programs under the Board’s health and safety jurisdiction;
• Encourages the creation of co-ed or open categories where all individuals may compete without compromising female-only spaces.
  
  

These proposed rules would not bar transgender individuals from participating in sports. Instead, they strike a needed balance between inclusion and fairness by creating alternative categories that do not erase or endanger opportunities for female athletes.

7. Conclusion

This petition is not about discrimination; it is about defending equality under law and science. Women and girls in Virginia deserve safe, fair, and competitive sports. That was the spirit of Title IX, and it must remain the standard today.

The Virginia Board of Health has the opportunity—and responsibility—to take a leadership role in preserving female-only sports. We ask you to initiate rulemaking to provide much-needed regulatory clarity and protections for young female athletes across the Commonwealth.

Respectfully submitted,

Todd L. Gathje, Ph.D.

VP of Government Relations

The Family Foundation